Got into a free screenin' of Unknown up in Plano tonight, first free movie in a month.

I thought it was alright, not great or anything. A few continuity issues threw me off, and it slowed down a bit too often. The woman I wound up sittin' with said if she hadn't seen it for free, she wouldn't have paid for it 'til it hit the dollar theater.

I'm convinced that this film is rated so highly based on the fact that Stanley Kubrick directed it and Jack Nicholson starred in it. Don't get me wrong, the film is filled with striking compositions, many of which that have obviously entered the consciousness of the public and other filmmakers. Kubrick uses the new steadicam to great effect. But the film itself is often too self-important to be that scary. In fact, I'd say most of the introductory 90 minutes does more to build tedium than tension (and, at 90 minutes, it's just too long).

On the subject of Jack Nicholson, Steven King has long-complained that his casting made it obvious that the character would go insane by the end of the film, but I'm not so sure. It's Nicholson's performance that does it--he's practically gone around the bend in his first scene, judging from the look on his face.

Well, my tour of the Oscar Nominated films came to an end today with the final nominee for Best Picture, 127 Hours. Before I get into the movie, I want to say that this movie made me nausious today and I almost passed out in the theater. It was during the initial collapse of the boulder onto Aron's Arm and my friend was worried that I did pass out. I didn't, but it left me dazed.

I think that speaks to the power of this film. It's a film light on cast, and one that only focuses on one character is a risk because the story needs to be strong if the characters aren't. Well, this story was very strong, because it spoke not just about the hell this guy went through, but I found the scene where he's thinking that it was his destiny that the Rock and him were to "cross Paths", I left the theater realizing that was probably the point of the movie, not the amputating of the arm, but the will to survive and never take things for granted. Also, the survival in this film was very well done, and for being focused on Franco, it was a very good and powerful movie.

When he actually did the amputation I had to look away, but the context of that scene was not missed. It was about redemption, freedom, realizing the misdeeds of before and making right and never taking human compassion for granted. This film was rich in so many different subjects that it was well worth the price of admission.

"All-Star Superman" (A). Outstanding adaption, with strong performances from the voice actors, excellent animation and score. This I would rank my second favorite of the DC DTV's right below "Batman:Under the Hood".

What a great movie. Getting away from Hogwarts really did this movie justice. I waited until it came to the cheap theaters to see it, but I'm regretting that now. Just everything about this movie is perfect. I especially liked the jab at Twilight but I don't think anyone else in the theater was smart enough to get it.

This fourth installment has one of the better name recognition casts in David Boreanaz, Tara Reid, Eddie Furlong, Emanuelle Chiriqi(sp) and Dennis Hopper. The film had some good set pieces and location shooting. It seems the rumors of them attempting to get this released theatrical make sense just based on the increase in quality from the third movie.

I make no illusions it's great but my grade is really due as much if not mostly due to Eddie Furlong. He is the weak link in the film. Had the movie broke out the metaphor would've been ironic but Eddie does not work as the lead imo. A better lead and this movie could easily move up a letter grade. David Boreanaz as the cult leader is great. Shades of Angelus shine through and if you liked his evil self on Angel you'll know what I mean.

Rewatch! This is the first time I've seen this since it first came out, so I thought I'd revisit it before the Oscars as a refresher (also, a cousin who hadn't seen it was visiting). I originally rated this an "A", but ended up downgrading it a half-grade on rewatch; not, to be clear, due to the various debates about its accuracy (I knew that the first time, and wild inaccuracy was good enough for Shakespeare, so if Fincher and Sorkin can do the same). And most of the things hold up superbly: the performances are uniformly strong (Andrew Garfield narrowly missed out on a nomination for this; I'd have put him in ahead of Ruffalo or Renner, personally, two performances I really liked), the technical aspects likewise (Fincher would get my director vote; he puts a distinctly different spin on Sorkin's material than I've seen elsewhere).

My main issue is that, looking over it again, I increasingly find that apart from its strong character drama, I really don't agree with the various premises that Sorkin seems to hold about the internet and internet culture. He has a long history of hostility to the internet, and is self-admittedly barely web-literate (one of the reasons the film really can't be seen as some generation-defining commentary, which some of its more ardent proponents have labelled it, something I think does more harm than good to the movie).

This is the second time I've seen this film, inspired by a six dollar sale price at Blockbuster (for the film on Blu-Ray) and a recent thread. By no means can I describe it as good, but for all its faults (for one thing, it's at least a 40 million dollar movie with a 10 million dollar budget) it manages to provide much of the sharp satire that went missing in the first abysmal sequel to Verhoeven's brilliant subversion of the original novel.

That said, many of the performances are just awful. It says something that Casper Van Dien is better than (most) of his co-stars. Also, some of the visual allusions are more than I can handle. I'm especially thinking of the silly quotation of religious imagery at the end. That said, it also includes the brilliant "A. God exists, B. He's on our side, and C. He wants us to Win." Fednet bit, so it's hard to gauge it's religious politics.

Oh, and there's a musical number, obviously pardoying John Ashcroft. It might be the finest moment in the film, which sounds rather odd, but see the film and you'll know what I mean.

I saw Paul, a road trip comedy with a science-fiction spin. It was directed by Greg Mottola, who directed the raunchy but memorable teenage comedy Superbad and the surprisingly affecting Adventureland. It stars, and was written by, Simon Pegg and Nick Frost. The duo usually collaborate with writer-producer-director Edgar Wright (Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz) but he was absent here, and while Paul was a heartfelt and genuinely funny comedy, it was sorely missing Wright's comedic sensibilities.

The movie chronicles two best friends (Pegg and Frost) who travel from the UK to America and attend Comic-Con, with a plan to take a road trip and experience Area 51 and some UFO-inspired destinations along the way. They end up encountering an actual, real UFO who goes by the name of Paul (voiced by Seth Rogen), whilst being chased by federal agents (Jason Bateman, Bill Hader) and encountering wacky supporting characters (featuring a wide range of actors: Kirsten Wiig, Jane Lynch, Blythe Danner and Sigourney Weaver).

The film had a lot going for it with its incredible cast and some truly capable talent behind the camera. However, despite all of this, Paul manages to be only mildly amusing with some genuinely funny moments however they end up feeling contrived and forced. Edgar Wright has some truly ingenious comedic sensibilities, but without Wright, the script written by Pegg and Frost veers too much in the way of bland, generic potty and vulgar humor. There are some moments of inspiration, and the acting across the board is impressive, but I can't help but feeling slightly let down by the film. It's capably directed, however Greg Mottola has directed better movies.

I'm not quite sure how to pin it down, but even though Paul is an above-average road trip comedy with a heartfelt center, I feel like it should have been more memorable or better given the pedigree of talent involved. I guess I just had high hopes and expectations, and I'm probably giving this film a worse review than it deserves. Paul is truly a witty, funny, and genuinely heartfelt comedy with some terrific actors and a droll story. I would definitely recommend the film, if anything to just absorb the clever premise and the talented cast of performers.

It's not as good as it could have been, but it was pretty entertaining and enjoyable nevertheless.

1. In the Heat of the Night (A)
2. The Passion of Joan of Arc (B)
3. The Passion of the Christ (A)
4. Mamma Mia! (B)
5. All About Eve (A)
6. Looking for Anne (B-)
7. 2001: A Space Odyssey (B+)
8. The King's Speech (A)
9. How Green Was My Valley (B-)

10. Black Swan (B+)
11. Made in Dagenham (B)
12. Gentleman's Agreement (A-)
13. Barney's Version (A-)
14. Out of Africa (B)
15. The Social Network (A-)16. The Sound of Music (B+)

The third-highest-grossing film of all time (adjusted), and one of the iconic musicals; this is one of those movies that, on watching it, you spot a billion ways its been referenced in subsequent pop culture. I'm seeing it for the first time at 23; this is the sort of film I should perhaps have been shown earlier. All the same, it's a charming piece of work, though I don't "love" it in the way so many do. It's notably rather loose in structure; the odd reference aside, antagonists don't present themselves until the last thirty minutes or so. All the same, I admire them for not turning the Baroness into a total villain for the sake of having one.

1. In the Heat of the Night (A)
2. The Passion of Joan of Arc (B)
3. The Passion of the Christ (A)
4. Mamma Mia! (B)
5. All About Eve (A)
6. Looking for Anne (B-)
7. 2001: A Space Odyssey (B+)
8. The King's Speech (A)
9. How Green Was My Valley (B-)

10. Black Swan (B+)
11. Made in Dagenham (B)
12. Gentleman's Agreement (A-)
13. Barney's Version (A-)
14. Out of Africa (B)
15. The Social Network (A-)16. The Sound of Music (B+)

The third-highest-grossing film of all time (adjusted), and one of the iconic musicals; this is one of those movies that, on watching it, you spot a billion ways its been referenced in subsequent pop culture. I'm seeing it for the first time at 23; this is the sort of film I should perhaps have been shown earlier. All the same, it's a charming piece of work, though I don't "love" it in the way so many do. It's notably rather loose in structure; the odd reference aside, antagonists don't present themselves until the last thirty minutes or so. All the same, I admire them for not turning the Baroness into a total villain for the sake of having one.

Click to expand...

I'm 35 and there was a time when The Sound of Music would be on TV at least once a year. That was before cable really took off in the 90's though. That along with The Ten Commandments and Wizard of Oz used to air at leat once but I digress.

My girlfriend before we were serious teased me that I had The Sound of Music and Mary Poppins on DVD. She couldn't fathom why I'd have those right next to Rocky, Star Trek, Rambo, Stargate and other such obvious testerone flicks. It puzzled her.

Now of course she knows I'm a movie buff but I told her classics are classics for a reason. Appearances be damned. Glad you liked it on first viewing Canada!

14. Monsters (2010) - C+. This movie is more about the characters than the titular monsters, but the problem is, I didn't find the characters to be all that interesting. This is basically a road trip movie / love story with the twist that the road trip is through an "infected zone" in Nothern Mexico, populated by invading alien creatures that are something like a cross between a Giraffe and an Octopus. There were several neat reveals about the creatures, and the effects for such a low budget film were very well done (it's been noted just about everywhere that the effects were done on a laptop- and really, they look pretty good). Fairly decent movie with an interesting mythology but is brought down a bit by it's weak romance. I just really didn't care that the two leads ended up together.

15. The Tune (Bill Plympton) - C. First full length Plympton movie I've seen (and his first attempt at one, from what I read). It's not bad, some of the songs are funny, but at just a little over an hour it still seemed to drag in spots. Some of the animation sequences are inspired, others no so much, and the inclusion of some of his previous shorts in full will detract from the experience for those who are already familiar with his work.